tagged w/ Libertarian Spam
-
When people cannot for some reason govern themselves – they turn to a small group of people to do it for them. They lack the belief in their own abilities to fix something, so they turn to an outside force to level the playing field. The irony here is that the playing field itself was never tilted to begin with. As such, it is the idea that everyon
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5785/the-plight-of-mariestown/When people cannot for some reason govern themselves – they turn to a small... more
-
-
-
What if we voted for Barack Obama, a rational moderate, and instead got one of the most irrational, secretive, and authoritarian presidential administrations of the past 100 years?
What if Ron Paul and Buddy Roemer are right about the election process and about the erosion of our core civil rights? And what if Barack Obama truly DOES think the Constitution is an outdated joke?What if we voted for Barack Obama, a rational moderate, and instead got one of the... more
-
-
As the definition of a domestic extremist continues to expand to include activists for peace, animal rights, currency, natural health, liberty and other noble causes, the FBI is ready to make an example out of one group in particular: Libertarians.
The FBI held a press conference Monday to "increase the visibility of the threat" that people who oppose taxes and regulations, government intrusions into their private property, and the desire for sound money allegedly pose to local authorities.
Although the FBI vaguely attempts to label this group as "sometimes known as 'sovereign citizens'", the description sounds an awful lot like me, and millions of other liberty-minded people in America that don't associate with any group.
They also sound like Ron Paul supporters.
According to Reuters:
Anti-government extremists opposed to taxes and regulations pose a growing threat to local law enforcement officers in the United States, the FBI warned on Monday.
These extremists, sometimes known as 'sovereign citizens,' believe they can live outside any type of government authority, FBI agents said at a news conference.
The extremists may refuse to pay taxes, defy government environmental regulations and believe the United States went bankrupt by going off the gold standard.
Notice the resolute use of the word "extremists" but the vague description "sometimes known as sovereign citizens." Yet the description that these "extremists may refuse to pay taxes and defy government environmental regulations" sounds more like General Electric than average liberty activists who the FBI clearly seems hellbent on demonizing.
Additionally, the official mission for Sovereign Citizens is to "Protect Property Rights and American Civil Liberties." As fierce protectors of property rights, they take environmental damage quite seriously. Many would argue that an environmental policy governed by property rights is far more effective than the bloated EPA which is wholly owned by corporate polluters.
"Sovereign members often express particular outrage at tax collection, putting Internal Revenue Service employees at risk," Reuters assumes. Yet, choosing not to pay taxes is by definition a form of non-violent civil disobedience. And no credible threats against individual IRS agents were cited.
Opposing taxes only seems dangerous to those who wish to perpetuate this prison society. I would even suggest that it's far more dangerous to continue to fund an organization who wages murderous wars abroad based on lies, who builds a militarized police state at home, who removes all individual liberty in the name of safety, and who bails out criminal cartels while the innocent suffer. The real extremists would seem to be the ones who support such a blood-thirsty organization, not the people who oppose its wicked ways.
But the FBI does their best to convince us that that sovereign citizens are dangerous extremists by warning us they can turn violent "at the drop of a hat," as Stuart McArthur, assistant director in the FBI's counterterrorism division, said at the press conference.
As evidence, McArthur refers to one incident where two men claiming to be Sovereign Citizens killed two Arkansas policemen after an argument. Because this isolated and highly suspect incident is hardly worthy of labeling an entire philosophical group as violent, McArthur desperately tries to dignify the reason for the FBI's alert with other, even more vague examples:
Last year, an extremist in Texas opened fire on a police officer during a traffic stop. The officer was not hit.
Legal convictions of such extremists, mostly for white-collar crimes such as fraud, have increased from 10 in 2009 to 18 each in 2010 and 2011, FBI agents said.
Eighteen "such extremists" convicted of white collar fraud! That's all you can produce with an $8 billion FBI budget? And you wonder why people think their taxes may be better spent elsewhere?
The FBI and the Reuter's reporter must have forgotten to check the Sovereign Citizens' own website to see their very clear statement in complete disagreement to all allegations made in this article:
We do NOT endorse non-payment of taxes or violence to achieve these changes. We do NOT endorse giving up a social security number and we do NOT endorse violence against the police or the government.
But recently, the feds somehow excused the use of a domestic drone of all things in the arrest of farmers accused of stealing a handful of cattle because the farmers were said to be Sovereign Citizens.
It appears the federal government is trying to make an enemy out of non-violent activists, especially liberty activists. Imagine, people concerned with peace and liberty are the enemy of the FBI. What's the opposite of peace and liberty? War and tyranny. Which side are you on?
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/02/fbi-attempts-to-make-libertarians.htmlAs the definition of a domestic extremist continues to expand to include activists for... more
-
-
In yet another attempt to ‘ensure our liberties’, congress is currently debating Stop Online Piracy Act – aka SOPA. The very fact that their current laws are unenforceable due to a lack of personnel and funding, congress apparently feels that more laws are the answer…again. In their twisted heads, they seem to believe that by denying a dns (domain name service) entry onto the web via its ISP (Internet Service Provider), they can somehow save money. Just a few minor holes into this thing that I would like to shoot down right now.
1 – Smaller ISP’s are to be more impacted by this than the larger ones – small wonder as to why the big dogs in the major Companies support this nonsense (for a list of supporting companies, go t......
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/6151/12-reasons-why-sopa-is-worse-than-you-think/In yet another attempt to ‘ensure our liberties’, congress is currently... more
-
-
"All religions have based morality on obedience, that is to say, on voluntary slavery. That is why they have always been more pernicious than any political organization. For the latter makes use of violence, the former - of the corruption of the will."
-Alexander Herzen"All religions have based morality on obedience, that is to say, on voluntary... more
-
-
-
Anarchist Artist Victor Pross takes on a few common objections to the idea of a stateless society, philosophical anarchism. Those objections remain the same, forever spinning out on a hamster wheel, repeatedly and persistently: “What about the roads? What about the poor? What about violent crimes? What about theft?”
Listen to this video for a different perspective to the nature of the issue.
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5782/objections-to-the-freedom-movement/Anarchist Artist Victor Pross takes on a few common objections to the idea of a... more
-
-
-
“I, David P Shirk, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.” – August 8, 1998.
If there is one regret I have had in my lifetime, it was the utterance of those words. My intentions were good, after all, I wanted to protect people and serve them – just as so many I knew and respected who came before me. What I didn’t know at the time was my countries history (great job public school system), and the full actions taken by the government since its founding.
Before 9-11, I started seeing my job as having no real point. I was good at it to be sure, but could not see its use. We were not under attack, and the US seemed to be doing okay without using us. Then 9-11 happened, and everything changed. At first, I was eager to find the people responsible, and go earn my pay. Thank goodness my name was never called up for the task. I never would have thought at the time that the attack on the towers was the result of foreign meddling for the better part of 50 years.
Yet that one event set off a red flag in my head, and it was during that time tha.......
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5734/oathbreaker/“I, David P Shirk, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the... more
-
-
If you do not have a right to infringe on others, then you cannot give a right that you do not have, the right to infringe on others, to someone else.If you do not have a right to infringe on others, then you cannot give a right that... more
-
-
October 7th 2011 will mark the 10 year anniversary of the war in the Middle East. This 10 years of war, has gone on for far too long.
War has a heavy cost, a heavy cost that we don’t think about in our daily busy lives. That cost is your children or your grandchildren dying before their time, being severely injured or mentally scarred for life.
War is your brothers and sisters being taught to kill other people — and to hate people who are just like themselves and who don’t want to kill anyone either.
War is your children seeing their friends killed before their very eyes or seeing their limbs blown off their bodies.
War is genocide; it is hundreds of thousands of human beings dying years before their time.
War is millions of people separated forever from their loved ones.
War is the destruction of homes which people worked for.
War is the end of careers that meant as much to others as your career means to you.
You cannot put a cost on a human life, but the financial cost on war is now running into the trillions of dollars. As illustrated by Cost Of War Dot Com.
War is the imposition of heavy taxes on you, other Americans, and on people in other countries — taxes that remain long after the war is over.
War is the suppression of free speech and the jailing of people who criticize the government.
War is the imposition of slavery when young men and women serve in the military.
War is goading the public to hate foreign people and races.
It is time to end the war and bring the troops home.
If you like the majority of Americans want to end the bombing and occupation of the Middle East.
Visit http://www.AntiWar.com, or Call Angela at: 1-323-512-7095
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5719/10-years-in-the-middle-east-is-far-too-long-antiwar/October 7th 2011 will mark the 10 year anniversary of the war in the Middle East.... more
-
-
Methodology – a set or system of methods, principles, and rules for regulating a given discipline; the underlying principles and rules of organization of a philosophical system or inquiry procedure; a branch of pedagogics dealing with analysis and evaluation of subjects to be taught and of the methods of teaching them.
Policy – a definite course of action adopted for the sake of expediency, facility, etc; a course of action adopted and pursued by a government, ruler, political party, etc.; action or procedure conforming to or considered with reference to prudence or expediency.
In the army, training doctrine is drawn and taught with a methodology that is set forth as a policy. On the most basic of levels, it is slimmed down and simple. This is not because it assumes a new recruit is stupid. It is done because in order for a large body of people to act in a coordinated and efficient manner, the more synchronized they have to be. The only way to do this, is to teach all recruits the basics, and grind them so far in that what is learned becomes almost as natural as breathing. You are taught to obey, not to question. This is on the premise that th....
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5642/the-failed-policy-called-government/Methodology – a set or system of methods, principles, and rules for regulating a... more
-
-
When Congress borrows money on the credit of the United States, bonds are thus legislated into existence and deposited as credit entries in Federal Reserve banks. United States bonds, bills and notes constitute money as affirmed by the Supreme Court (Legal Tender Cases, 110 U.S. 421), and this money when deposited with the Fed becomes collateral from whence the Treasury may write checks against the credit thus created in its account (12 USC 391). For example, suppose Congress appropriates an expenditure of $1 billion.
To finance the appropriation Congress creates the $1 billion worth of bonds out of thin air and deposits it with the privately owned Federal Reserve System. Upon receiving the bonds, the Fed credits $1 billion to the Treasury’s checking account, holding the deposited bonds as collateral. When the United States deposits its bonds with the Federal Reserve System, private credit is extended to the Treasury by the Fed. Under its power to borrow money, Congress is authorized by the Constitution to contract debt, and whenever something is borrowed it must be returned. When Congress spends the contracted private credit, each use of credit is debt which must be returned to the lender or Fed. Since Congress authorizes the expenditure of this private credit, the United States incurs the primary obligation to return the borrowed credit, creating a National Debt which results when credit is not returned.
However, if anyone else accepts this private credit and uses it to purchase goods and services, the user voluntarily incurs the obligation requiring him to make a return of income whereby a portion of the income is collected by the IRS and delivered to the Federal Reserve banksters.
Actually the federal income tax imparts two separate obligations: the obligation to file a return and the obligation to abide by the Internal Revenue Code. The obligation to make a return of income for using private credit is recognized in law as an irrecusable obligation, which according to ‘Bouvier’s Law Dictionary’ (1914 ed.), is “a term used to indicate a certain class of contractual obligations recognized by the law which are imposed upon a person without his consent and without regard to any act of his own.”
This is distinguished from a recusable obligation which, according to Bouvier, arises from a voluntary act by which one incurs the obligation imposed by the operation of law. The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.
In ‘Brushaber v. Union Pacific RR Co.’ 240 U.S. 1 (1916) the Supreme Court affirmed that the federal income tax is in the class of indirect taxes, which include duties and excises. The personal income tax arises from a duty — i.e., charge or fee — which is voluntarily incurred and subject to the rule of uniformity. A charge is a duty or obligation, binding upon him who enters into it, which may be removed or taken away by a discharge (performance): ‘Bouvier’, p. 459.
Our federal personal income tax is not really a tax in the ordinary sense of the word but rather a burden or obligation which the taxpayer voluntarily assumes, and the burden of the tax falls upon those who voluntarily use private credit. Simply stated the tax imposed is a charge or fee upon the use of private credit where the amount of private credit used measures the pecuniary obligation.
The personal income tax provision of the Internal Revenue Code is private law rather than public law. “A private law is one which is confined to particular individuals, associations, or corporations”: 50 Am.Jur. 12, p.28. In the instant case the revenue code pertains to taxpayers. A private law can be enforced by a court of competent jurisdiction when statutes for its enforcement are enacted: 20 Am.Jur. 33, pgs. 58, 59.
The distinction between public and private acts is not always sharply defined when published statutes are printed in their final form: Case v. Kelly, 133 U.S. 21 (1890). Statutes creating corporations are private acts: 20 Am.Jur. 35, p. 60. In this connection, the Federal Reserve Act is private law. Federal Reserve banks derive their existence and corporate power from the Federal Reserve Act: Armano v. Federal Reserve Bank, 468 F.Supp. 674 (1979).
A private act may be published as a public law when the general public is afforded the opportunity of participating in the operation of the private law. The Internal Revenue Code is an example of private law which does not exclude the voluntary participation of the general public. Had the Internal Revenue Code been written as substantive public law, the code would be repugnant to the Constitution, since no one could be compelled to file a return and thereby become a witness against himself.
Under the fifty titles listed on the preface page of the United States Code, the Internal Revenue Code (26 USC) is listed as having not been enacted as substantive public law, conceding that the Internal Revenue Code is private law. Bouvier declares that private law “relates to private matters which do not concern the public at large.”
It is the VOLUNTARY use of private credit which imposes upon the user the quasi contractual or implied obligation to make a return of income. In ‘Pollock v. Farmer’s Loan & Trust Co.’ 158 U.S. 601 (1895) the Supreme Court had declared the income tax of 1894 to be repugnant to the Constitution, holding that taxation of rents, wages and salaries must conform to the rule of apportionment.
However, when this decision was rendered, there was no privately owned central bank issuing private credit and currency but rather public money in the form of legal tender notes and coins of the United States circulated. Public money is the lawful money of the United States which the Constitution authorizes Congress to issue.........
Continue at:
http://bit.ly/qWrNIvWhen Congress borrows money on the credit of the United States, bonds are thus... more
-
-
-
Jury Rights Day!
A History
On September 5, we celebrate Jury Rights Day. On this day in 1670, Quaker William Penn of London was arrested, pled not guilty, and subsequently argued against England’s Conventicle Acts, which outlawed the practice of religions other than the Church of England.
The Judge instructed the Jurors to find Penn guilty. The Jurors’ refusal to enforce a bad law led to the Court jailing and withholding food and water from the Jurors. Read the rest about jury rights day and about your rights when you serve on a jury here at: http://fija.org/jury-rights-day/Jury Rights Day!
A History
On September 5, we celebrate Jury Rights Day. On this... more
-
-
Here is my story about my arrest Friday night and the reasons for it. I met Chris Nielsen, owner of Electric Cab of Austin, during my recent campaign.
He told me about his 3 year long battle with the City of Austin in which he had an idea to start a green energy business giving people rides on a “tips only” basis. He did not charge for his services, and really the business is a mobile marketing company that generates revenue from advertising on the side of his low speed electric vehicles.... Complete article can be found here... http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5590/continual-arrests-for-operating-without-a-permit-when-city-doesnt-provide-permit/Here is my story about my arrest Friday night and the reasons for it. I met Chris... more
-
-
Wouldn't it be great to be king or run government? But wait... Where does all the money come from to do all this?Wouldn't it be great to be king or run government? But wait... Where does all the... more
-
-
When the police show up at your house without a warrant (as required by the Constitution) - must you let them in? Tonight: property rights and the Constitution.
"Holy Sh*t.... I had to share with you folks this video!!!"When the police show up at your house without a warrant (as required by the... more
-
-
KB723
-
added this
-
11 months ago
- |
-
by David Shirk on May 25, 2011 in Philosophy
I was surprised to see some of the comments that I did on my last article – Thoughts of a Middling American Part 1 (http://current.com/1m4umkc ). I wonder if many of the readers even know where the term Middling came from. Empire of Liberty has a good few chapters on it – good book. That having been said, here is part two, and the answer to some of the comments.
“seems to me that you have made a whole lot of assumptions in your post.”
You do not seem to have read the entire article as I will now address.
“You said that any law that seeks to limit human behavior will fail. Well, I think the law that limits murder is a pretty good law, and yes it fails”
Murder is hardly normal human behavior – you then say “Isn’t the law there so people who do commit murder can be prosecuted for same?” And yet one need not go very far to see the very same law throwing people into prison or giving them life in prison (having been convicted of murder) – when the evidence was largely lacking – in addition, many have even had their innocence proven after the sentence has already been carried out. However I still see your point and consider it no less valid despite my opposing view on the matter – however how many laws do we have on the books in regards to murder as oppose to tax laws etc? Or if you believe that taxes are fully justified, then how about laws regarding trade, business transactions, ethics, civil rights etc? such laws have in the past benefitted some people, yet on the same token, cost far more to have to cut back as a result. Bastiat explained it far better than I ever could, and if you believe yourself to be smarter then he is in the grand scheme of things, then I would like to see you refute his points. Start with his short work – The Law.
“Funny, I find that we are being ruled more by the minority (large corporations) than by the majority (the people).” – We are ruled by the minority true – but does not the ‘majority’ as society calls it, elect the minority into office to ‘lead’ them? If so, then I stand by my corollary – “Even within the majority lies a major upset in belief systems. So how can a people honestly believe that whatever the majority on the whole agrees on will be beneficial to all? It cannot, and the notion people have that what works for them will work for me is offensive at best.”
“I guess you think that if a person has an “ivy league” education that they are some how not fit to hold office. Perhaps you would rather they not be educated at all.” – Trite. However consider this – if our leaders are so intelligent, then how is that after 230 years, we have become that which we fought against in the initial revolution? The truth is that there are libraries, seminars, bookstores, and a wealth of information online as well as discussion boards. Or even places to discuss ideas online. Besides, whether one has a degree or not is irrelevant – I could give you several essays and seminars written by a guy who holds a PhD and a masters degree, but because he disagree with your Phd and masters guy, it does not matter. This is why I listen to both, read the source material, watch for reactions, and judge for myself.
I have seen more attacks on the post then I have anything rebutting them – most are directed at the source not the content. Sad really.
Funny how the guy who did 10 years of law enforcement (and thus knows of which he speaks) was voted down simply for agreeing with me – most likely by those who never served themselves. Once again – kinda sad…I served 10 years in the army and am proficient in small team tactics. I would bet my bottom dollar that if I started posting these tactics on this forum, that they too would be voted down and have one sided comments thrown at them by those who never had any training or military studies at all. It seems that is what makes for intelligent talk on this forum.
More people argue the number of views then the content. I would laugh, but it’s really not funny. The truth is that I find it sick that people would rather argue about software bugs and rankings then actually debate on a comment based forum on the content of the article…oh well.
“since we have not spoken with these individuals personally, or seen any of their test scores, or IQ scores (altho IQ tests are no longer as popular as they once were) aren’t we actually engaging in the author’s style of ‘assumption’?” No you are not. If you catch someone in the act of murdering someone else, would you believe them if they were to finish killing, and then tell you that they didn’t do it? I judge off of actions taken – not by what the guys say. The more open your eyes are, and the more facts you gather to add context and depth, the more you reason and the less you assume.
“ I rather think that as finite humans we will engage in ‘assuming’ because on some level we must assume before we can prove or disprove a hypothesis (or assumption).”” We all make assumptions sometimes. I am certainly no exception. However I would never petition for a law based off of an ignorant assumption either. In addition – I know what I know, and what works for me – and would never try to impose my way of doing things onto you. I understand that you also know what you know, and like me – are sometimes forced into a position where you must assume. However there is nothing more dangerous than setting a policy or long term action based on assumption.
“I had a college instructor who always gave essay tests, but he stated at the outset of his class that you didn’t need to parrot back what he said was the correct answer, you merely needed to argue ‘your’ answer successfully — that is how we learn.” – Sounds like you had a good professor.
Okay – that’s enough of that; time for something completely different.
In martial arts, you try to keep yourself on guard and not present your opponent with an opening. If you overextend yourself or get off balance, you create an expanded target area that your opponent will take advantage of. National defense is no different – the more you expand your area of occupation, the more you open yourself up to attack.
If you see an injustice being visited upon someone else, and want to do something about it – then feel free. Just be aware that you don’t know the offender, or their capabilities. Also be aware of your surrounding and other potential threats to you should you choose to interfere, lest you to become a victim. The same goes for our foreign policy on ‘getting the bad guy’. Unfortunately we never bothered to learn the nature of what we attack before doing so hence the many ‘foreign interventions’ we have made – some over 60 years old – that we are still tied up in today.
It is noble to help someone else when you can. It is stupid if you try to help them and impoverish yourself in the process, for then someone will have to help you as well – the cycle never ends.
Someone who works for something themselves is far less likely to take it for granted, and far more likely to use the proceeds in a meaningful manner.
Do not attribute to malice what is done in ignorance. Wars start this way.
I have read entirely too many books not of the main stream. This is frustrating because few people read the books I read. Oprah sells more books than Allistair Horne, Wood, or Rothbard. People love commentary off of current events – people hate studying the history behind them.
We live in a snapshot society where the only reality that seems to matter is what is currently being felt or experienced. I cannot think of to many things more damaging to a people then the adoption of this mindset. When age old wisdom is replaced with common knowledge, the people doom the....
http://peacefreedomprosperity.com/5233/thoughts-of-a-middling-american-part-2/by David Shirk on May 25, 2011 in Philosophy
I was surprised to see some of the... more
-
